CHAPTER VI.

REIGN OF HENRY II.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1154.]

[Sidenote: A.D. 1158.]

The death of Stephen left an undisputed succession for the first time

since the death of Edward the Confessor. Henry, descended equally from

the Norman Conqueror and the old English kings, adopted by Stephen,

acknowledged by the barons, united in himself every kind of title. It

was grown into a custom for the king to grant a charter of liberties on

his accession to the crown. Henry also granted a charter of that kind,

confirming that of his grandfather; but as his situation was very

different from that of his predecessors, his charter was

different,--reserved, short, dry, conceived in general terms,--a gift,

not a bargain. And, indeed, there seems to have been at that juncture

but little occasion to limit a power which seemed not more than

sufficient to correct all the evils of an unlimited liberty. Henry spent

the beginning of his reign in repairing the ruins of the royal

authority, and in restoring to the kingdom peace and order, along with

its ancient limits; and he may well be considered as the restorer of the

English monarchy. Stephen had sacrificed the demesne of the crown, and

many of its rights, to his subjects; and the necessity of the times

obliged both that prince and the Empress Matilda to purchase, in their

turns, the precarious friendship of the King of Scotland by a cession of

almost all the country north of the Humber. But Henry obliged the King

of Scotland to restore his acquisitions, and to renew his homage. He

took the same methods with his barons. Not sparing the grants of his

mother, he resumed what had been so lavishly squandered by both of the

contending parties, who, to establish their claims, had given away

almost everything that made them valuable. There never was a prince in

Europe who better understood the advantages to be derived from its

peculiar constitution, in which greater acquisitions of dominion are

made by judicious marriages than by success in war: for, having added to

his patrimonial territories of Anjou and Normandy the Duchy of Guienne

by his own marriage, the male issue of the Dukes of Brittany failing, he

took the opportunity of marrying his third son, Geoffrey, then an

infant, to the heiress of that important province, an infant also; and

thus uniting by so strong a link his northern to his southern dominions,

he possessed in his own name, or in those of his wife and son, all that

fine and extensive country that is washed by the Atlantic Ocean, from

Picardy quite to the foot of the Pyrenees.

Henry, possessed of such extensive territories, and aiming at further

acquisitions, saw with indignation that the sovereign authority in all

of them, especially in England, had been greatly diminished. By his

resumptions he had, indeed, lessened the greatness of several of the

nobility. He had by force of arms reduced those who forcibly held the

crown lands, and deprived them of their own estates for their

rebellion. He demolished many castles, those perpetual resources of

rebellion and disorder. But the great aim of his policy was to break the

power of the clergy, which each of his predecessors, since Edward, had

alternately strove to raise and to depress,--at first in order to gain

that potent body to their interests, and then to preserve them in

subjection to the authority which they had conferred. The clergy had

elected Stephen; they had deposed Stephen, and elected Matilda; and in

the instruments which they used on these occasions they affirmed in

themselves a general right of electing the kings of England. Their share

both in the elevation and depression of that prince showed that they

possessed a power inconsistent with the safety and dignity of the state.

The immunities which they enjoyed seemed no less prejudicial to the

civil economy,--and the rather, as, in the confusion of Stephen's reign,

many, to protect themselves from the prevailing violence of the time, or

to sanctify their own disorders, had taken refuge in the clerical

character. The Church was never so full of scandalous persons, who,

being accountable only in the ecclesiastical courts, where no crime is

punished with death, were guilty of every crime. A priest had about this

time committed a murder attended with very aggravating circumstances.

The king, willing at once to restore order and to depress the clergy,

laid hold of this favorable opportunity to convoke the cause to his own

court, when the atrociousness of the crime made all men look with an

evil eye upon the claim of any privilege which might prevent the

severest justice. The nation in general seemed but little inclined to

controvert so useful a regulation with so potent a prince.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1162.]

Amidst this general acquiescence one man was found bold enough to oppose

him, who for eight years together embroiled all his affairs, poisoned

his satisfactions, endangered his dominions, and at length in his death

triumphed over all the power and policy of this wise and potent monarch.

This was Thomas à-Becket, a man memorable for the great glory and the

bitter reproaches he has met with from posterity. This person was the

son of a respectable citizen of London. He was bred to the study of the

civil and canon law, the education, then, used to qualify a man for

public affairs, in which he soon made a distinguished figure. By the

royal favor and his own abilities, he rose, in a rapid succession

through several considerable employments, from an office under the

sheriff of London, to be High Chancellor of the kingdom. In this high

post he showed a spirit as elevated; but it was rather a military spirit

than that of the gownman,--magnificent to excess in his living and

appearance, and distinguishing himself in the tournaments and other

martial sports of that age with much ostentation of courage and expense.

The king, who favored him greatly, and expected a suitable return, on

the vacancy, destined Becket, yet a layman, to the see of Canterbury,

and hoped to find in him a warm promoter of the reformation he intended.

Hardly a priest, he was made the first prelate in the kingdom. But no

sooner was he invested with the clerical character than the whole tenor

of his conduct was seen to change all at once: of his pompous retinue a

few plain servants only remained; a monastic temperance regulated his

table; and his life, in all respects formed to the most rigid austerity,

seemed to prepare him for that superiority he was resolved to assume,

and the conflicts he foresaw he must undergo in this attempt.

It will not be unpleasing to pause a moment at this remarkable period,

in order to view in what consisted that greatness of the clergy, which

enabled them to bear so very considerable a sway in all public

affairs,--what foundations supported the weight of so vast a

power,--whence it had its origin,--what was the nature, and what the

ground, of the immunities they claimed,--that we may the more fully

enter into this important controversy, and may not judge, as some have

inconsiderately done, of the affairs of those times by ideas taken from

the present manners and opinions.

It is sufficiently known, that the first Christians, avoiding the Pagan

tribunals, tried most even of their civil causes before the bishop, who,

though he had no direct coercive power, yet, wielding the sword of

excommunication, had wherewithal to enforce the execution of his

judgments. Thus the bishop had a considerable sway in temporal affairs,

even before he was owned by the temporal power. But the Emperors no

sooner became Christian than, the idea of profaneness being removed from

the secular tribunals, the causes of the Christian laity naturally

passed to that resort where those of the generality had been before. But

the reverence for the bishop still remained, and the remembrance of his

former jurisdiction. It was not thought decent, that he, who had been a

judge in his own court, should become a suitor in the court of another.

The body of the clergy likewise, who were supposed to have no secular

concerns for which they could litigate, and removed by their character

from all suspicion of violence, were left to be tried by their own

ecclesiastical superiors. This was, with a little variation, sometimes

in extending, sometimes in restraining the bishops' jurisdiction, the

condition of things whilst the Roman Empire subsisted. But though their

immunities were great and their possessions ample, yet, living under an

absolute form of government, they were powerful only by influence. No

jurisdictions were annexed to their lands; they had no place in the

senate; they were no order in the state.

From the settlement of the Northern nations the clergy must be

considered in another light. The Barbarians gave them large landed

possessions; and by giving them land, they gave them jurisdiction,

which, according to their notions, was inseparable from it. They made

them an order in the state; and as all the orders had their privileges,

the clergy had theirs, and were no less steady to preserve and ambitious

to extend them. Our ancestors, having united the Church dignities to the

secular dignities of baronies, had so blended the ecclesiastical with

the temporal power in the same persons that it became almost impossible

to separate them. The ecclesiastical was, however, prevalent in this

composition, drew to it the other, supported it, and was supported by

it. But it was not the devotion only, but the necessity of the tunes,

that raised the clergy to the excess of this greatness. The little

learning which then subsisted remained wholly in their hands. Few among

the laity could even read; consequently the clergy alone were proper for

public affairs. They were the statesmen, they were the lawyers; from

them were often taken the bailiffs of the seigneurial courts, sometimes

the sheriffs of counties, and almost constantly the justiciaries of the

kingdom.[78] The Norman kings, always jealous of their order, were

always forced to employ them. In abbeys the law was studied; abbeys were

the palladiums of the public liberty by the custody of the royal

charters and most of the records. Thus, necessary to the great by their

knowledge, venerable to the poor by their hospitality, dreadful to all

by the power of excommunication, the character of the clergy was exalted

above everything in the state; and it could no more be otherwise in

those days than it is possible it should be so in ours.

William the Conqueror made it one principal point of his politics to

reduce the clergy; but all the steps he took in it were not equally well

calculated to answer this intention. When he subjected the Church lands

to military service, the clergy complained bitterly, as it lessened

their revenue: but I imagine it did not lessen their power in

proportion; for by this regulation they came, like other great lords, to

have their military vassals, who owed them homage and fealty: and this

rather increased their consideration amongst so martial a people. The

kings who succeeded him, though they also aimed at reducing the

ecclesiastical power, never pursued their scheme on a great or

legislative principle. They seemed rather desirous of enriching

themselves by the abuses in the Church than earnest to correct them. One

day they plundered and the next day they founded monasteries, as their

rapaciousness or their scruples chanced to predominate; so that every

attempt of that kind, having rather the air of tyranny than reformation,

could never be heartily approved or seconded by the body of the people.

The bishops must always be considered in the double capacity of clerks

and barons. Their courts, therefore, had a double jurisdiction: over the

clergy and laity of their diocese for the cognizance of crimes against

ecclesiastical law, and over the vassals of their barony as lords

paramount. But these two departments, so different in their nature, they

frequently confounded, by making use of the spiritual weapon of

excommunication to enforce the judgments of both; and this sentence,

cutting off the party from the common society of mankind, lay equally

heavy on all ranks: for, as it deprived the lower sort of the fellowship

of their equals and the protection of their lord, so it deprived the

lord of the services of his vassals, whether he or they lay under the

sentence. This was one of the grievances which the king proposed to

redress.

As some sanction of religion is mixed with almost every concern of civil

life, and as the ecclesiastical court took cognizance of all religious

matters, it drew to itself not only all questions relative to tithes and

advowsons, but whatever related to marriages, wills, the estate of

intestates, the breaches of oaths and contracts,--in a word, everything

which did not touch life or feudal property.

The ignorance of the bailiffs in lay courts, who were only possessed of

some feudal maxims and the traditions of an uncertain custom, made this

recourse to the spiritual courts the more necessary, where they could

judge with a little more exactness by the lights of the canon and civil

laws.

This jurisdiction extended itself by connivance, by necessity, by

custom, by abuse, over lay persons and affairs. But the immunity of the

clergy from lay cognizances was claimed, not only as a privilege

essential to the dignity of their order, supported by the canons, and

countenanced by the Roman law, but as a right confirmed by all the

ancient laws of England.

Christianity, coming into England out of the bosom of the Roman Empire,

brought along with it all those ideas of immunity. The first trace we

can find of this exemption from lay jurisdiction in England is in the

laws of Ethelred;[79] it is more fully established in those of

Canute;[80] but in the code of Henry I. it is twice distinctly

affirmed.[81] This immunity from the secular jurisdiction, whilst it

seemed to encourage acts of violence in the clergy towards others,

encouraged also the violence of others against them. The murder of a

clerk could not be punished at this time by death; it was against a

spiritual person, an offence wholly spiritual, of which the secular

courts took no sort of cognizance. In the Saxon times two circumstances

made such an exemption less a cause of jealousy: the sheriff sat with

the bishop, and the spiritual jurisdiction was, if not under the

control, at least under the inspection of the lay officer; and then, as

neither laity nor clergy were capitally punished for any offence, this

privilege did not create so invidious and glaring a distinction between

them. Such was the power of the clergy, and such the immunities, which

the king proposed to diminish.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1164.]

Becket, who had punished the ecclesiastic for his crime by

ecclesiastical law, refused to deliver him over to the secular judges

for farther punishment, on the principle of law, that no man ought to be

twice questioned for the same offence. The king, provoked at this

opposition, summoned a council of the barons and bishops at Clarendon;

and here, amongst others of less moment, the following were unanimously

declared to be the ancient prerogatives of the crown. And it is

something remarkable, and certainly makes much for the honor of their

moderation, that the bishops and abbots who must have composed so large

and weighty a part of the great council seem not only to have made no

opposition to regulations which so remarkably contracted their

jurisdiction, but even seem to have forwarded them.

1st. A clerk accused of any crime shall appear in the king's court, that

it may be judged whether he belongs to ecclesiastical or secular

cognizance. If to the former, a deputy shall go into the bishop's court

to observe the trial; if the clerk be convicted, he shall be delivered

over to the king's justiciary to be punished.

2nd. All causes concerning presentation, all causes concerning

Frankalmoign, all actions concerning breach of faith, shall be tried in

the king's court.

3rd. The king's tenant _in capite_ shall not be excommunicated without

the king's license.

4th. No clerk shall go out of the kingdom without giving security that

he will do nothing to the prejudice of the king or nation. And all

appeals shall be tried at home.

These are the most material of the Constitutions or Assizes of

Clarendon, famous for having been the first legal check given to the

power of the clergy in England. To give these constitutions the greater

weight, it was thought proper that they should be confirmed by a bull

from the Pope. By this step the king seemed to doubt the entireness of

his own authority in his dominions; and by calling in foreign aid when

it served his purpose, he gave it a force and a sort of legal sanction

when it came to be employed against himself. But as no negotiation had

prepared the Pope in favor of laws designed in reality to abridge his

own power, it was no wonder that he rejected them with indignation.

Becket, who had not been prevailed on to accept them but with infinite

reluctance, was no sooner apprised of the Pope's disapprobation than he

openly declared his own; he did penance in the humblest manner for his

former acquiescence, and resolved to make amends for it by opposing the

new constitutions with the utmost zeal. In this disposition the king saw

that the Archbishop might be more easily ruined than humbled, and his

ruin was resolved. Immediately a number of suits, on various pretences,

were commenced against him, in every one of which he was sure to be

foiled; but these making no deadly blow at his fortunes, he was called

to account for thirty thousand pounds which he was accused of having

embezzled during his chancellorship. It was in vain that he pleaded a

full acquittance from the king's son, and Richard de Lucy, the guardian

and justiciary of the kingdom, on his resignation of the seals; he saw

it was already determined against him. Far from yielding under these

repeated blows, he raised still higher the ecclesiastical pretensions,

now become necessary to his own protection. He refused to answer to the

charge, and appealed to the Pope, to whom alone he seemed to acknowledge

any real subjection. A great ferment ensued on this appeal. The

courtiers advised that he should be thrown into prison, and that his

temporalities should be seized. The bishops, willing to reduce Becket

without reducing their own order, proposed to accuse him before the

Pope, and to pursue him to degradation. Some of his friends pressed him

to give up his cause; others urged him to resign his dignity. The king's

servants threw out menaces against his life. Amidst this general

confusion of passions and councils, whilst every one according to his

interests expected the event with much anxiety, Becket, in the disguise

of a monk, escaped out of the nation, and threw himself into the arms of

the King of France.

Henry was greatly alarmed at this secession, which put the Archbishop

out of his power, but left him in full possession of all his

ecclesiastical weapons. An embassy was immediately dispatched to Rome,

in order to accuse Becket; but as Becket pleaded the Pope's own cause

before the Pope himself, he obtained an easy victory over the king's

ambassadors. Henry, on the other hand, took every measure to maintain

his authority: he did everything worthy of an able politician, and of a

king tenacious of his just authority. He likewise took measures not only

to humble Becket, but also to lower that chair whose exaltation had an

ill influence on the throne: for he encouraged the Bishop of London to

revive a claim to the primacy; and thus, by making the rights of the see

at least dubious, he hoped to render future prelates more cautious in

the exercise of them. He inhibited, under the penalty of high treason,

all ecclesiastics from going out of his dominions without license, or

any emissary of the Pope's or Archbishop's from entering them with

letters of excommunication or interdict. And that he might not supply

arms against himself, the Peter-pence were collected with the former

care, but detained in the royal treasury, that matter might be left to

Rome both for hope and fear. In the personal treatment of Becket all the

proceedings were full of anger, and by an unnecessary and unjust

severity greatly discredited both the cause and character of the king;

for he stripped of their goods and banished all the Archbishop's

kindred, all who were in any sort connected with him, without the least

regard to sex, age, or condition. In the mean time, Becket, stung with

these affronts, impatient of his banishment, and burning with all the

fury and the same zeal which had occasioned it, continually threatened

the king with the last exertions of ecclesiastical power; and all things

were thereby, and by the absence and enmity of the head of the English

Church, kept in great confusion.

During this unhappy contention several treaties were set on foot; but

the disposition of all the parties who interested themselves in this

quarrel very much protracted a determination in favor of either side.

With regard to Rome, the then Pope was Alexander the Third, one of the

wisest prelates who had ever governed that see, and the most zealous for

extending its authority. However, though incessantly solicited by Becket

to excommunicate the king and to lay the kingdom under an interdict, he

was unwilling to keep pace with the violence of that enraged bishop.

Becket's view was single; but the Pope had many things to consider: an

Antipope then subsisted, who was strongly supported by the Emperor; and

Henry had actually entered into a negotiation with this Emperor and

this pretended Pope. On the other hand, the king knew that the lower

sort of people in England were generally affected to the Archbishop, and

much under the influence of the clergy. He was therefore fearful to

drive the Pope to extremities by wholly renouncing his authority. These

dispositions in the two principal powers made way for several

conferences leading to peace. But for a long time all their endeavors

seemed rather to inflame than to allay the quarrel. Whilst the king,

steady in asserting his rights, remembered with bitterness the

Archbishop's opposition, and whilst the Archbishop maintained the claims

of the Church with an haughtiness natural to him, and which was only

augmented by his sufferings, the King of France appeared sometimes to

forward, sometimes to perplex the negotiation: and this duplicity seemed

to be dictated by the situation of his affairs. He was desirous of

nourishing a quarrel which put so redoubted a vassal on the defensive;

but he was also justly fearful of driving so powerful a prince to forget

that he was a vassal. All parties, however, wearied at length with a

contest by which all were distracted, and which in its issue promised

nothing favorable to any of them, yielded at length to an accommodation,

founded rather on an oblivion and silence of past disputes than on the

settlement of terms for preserving future tranquillity. Becket returned

in a sort of triumph to his see. Many of the dignified clergy, and not a

few of the barons, lay under excommunication for the share they had in

his persecution; but, neither broken by adversity nor softened by good

fortune, he relented nothing of his severity, but referred them all for

their absolution to the Pope. Their resentments were revived with

additional bitterness; new affronts were offered to the Archbishop,

which brought on new excommunications and interdicts. The contention

thickened on all sides, and things seemed running precipitately to the

former dangerous extremities, when the account of these contests was

brought, with much aggravation against Becket, to the ears of the king,

then in Normandy, who, foreseeing a new series of troubles, broke out in

a violent passion of grief and anger,--"I have no friends, or I had not

so long been insulted by this haughty priest!" Four knights who attended

near his person, thinking that the complaints of a king are orders for

revenge, and hoping a reward equal to the importance and even guilt of

the service, silently departed; and passing with great diligence into

England, in a short time they arrived at Canterbury. They entered the

cathedral; they fell on the Archbishop, just on the point of celebrating

divine service, and with repeated blows of their clubs they beat him to

the ground, they broke his skull in pieces, and covered the altar with

his blood and brains.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1171.]

The horror of this barbarous action, increased by the sacredness of the

person who suffered and of the place where it was committed, diffused

itself on all sides with incredible rapidity. The clergy, in whose cause

he fell, equalled him to the most holy martyrs; compassion for his fate

made all men forget his faults; and the report of frequent miracles at

his tomb sanctified his cause and character, and threw a general odium

on the king. What became of the murderers is uncertain: they were

neither protected by the king nor punished by the laws, for the reason

we have not long since mentioned. The king with infinite difficulty

extricated himself from the consequences of this murder, which

threatened, under the Papal banners, to arm all Europe against him; nor

was he absolved, but by renouncing the most material parts of the

Constitutions of Clarendon, by purging himself upon oath of the murder

of Becket, by doing a very humiliating penance at his tomb to expiate

the rash words which had given occasion to his death, and by engaging to

furnish a large sum of money for the relief of the Holy Land, and taking

the cross himself as soon as his affairs should admit it. The king

probably thought his freedom from the haughtiness of Becket cheaply

purchased by these condescensions: and without question, though Becket

might have been justifiable, perhaps even laudable, for his steady

maintenance of the privileges which his Church and his order had

acquired by the care of his predecessors, and of which he by his place

was the depository, yet the principles upon which he supported these

privileges, subversive of all good government, his extravagant ideas of

Church power, the schemes he meditated, even to his death, to extend it

yet further, his violent and unreserved attachment to the Papacy, and

that inflexible spirit which all his virtues rendered but the more

dangerous, made his death as advantageous, at that time, as the means by

which it was effected were sacrilegious and detestable.

Between the death of Becket and the king's absolution he resolved on the

execution of a design by which he reduced under his dominion a country

not more separated from the rest of Europe by its situation than by the

laws, customs, and way of life of the inhabitants: for the people of

Ireland, with no difference but that of religion, still retained the

native manners of the original Celts. The king had meditated this design

from the very beginning of his reign, and had obtained a bull from the

then Pope, Adrian the fourth, an Englishman, to authorize the attempt.

He well knew, from the internal weakness and advantageous situation of

this noble island, the easiness and importance of such a conquest. But

at this particular time he was strongly urged to his engaging personally

in the enterprise by two other powerful motives. For, first, the murder

of Becket had bred very ill humors in his subjects, the chiefs of whom,

always impatient of a long peace, were glad of any pretence for

rebellion; it was therefore expedient, and serviceable to the crown, to

find an employment abroad for this spirit, which could not exert itself

without being destructive at home. And next, as he had obtained the

grant of Ireland from the Pope, upon condition of subjecting it to

Peter-pence, he knew that the speedy performance of this condition would

greatly facilitate his recovering the good graces of the court of Rome.

Before we give a short narrative of the reduction of Ireland, I propose

to lay open to the reader the state of that kingdom, that we may see

what grounds Henry had to hope for success in this expedition.

Ireland is about half as large as England. In the temperature of the

climate there is little difference, other than that more rain falls; as

the country is more mountainous, and exposed full to the westerly wind,

which, blowing from the Atlantic Ocean, prevails during the greater part

of the year. This moisture, as it has enriched the country with large

and frequent rivers, and spread out a number of fair and magnificent

lakes beyond the proportion of other places, has on the other hand

incumbered the island with an uncommon multitude of bogs and morasses;

so that in general it is less praised for corn than pasturage, in which

no soil is more rich and luxuriant. Whilst it possesses these internal

means of wealth, it opens on all sides a great number of ports, spacious

and secure, and by their advantageous situation inviting to universal

commerce. But on these ports, better known than those of Britain in the

time of the Romans, at this time there were few towns, scarce any

fortifications, and no trade that deserves to be mentioned.

The people of Ireland lay claim to a very extravagant antiquity, through

a vanity common to all nations. The accounts which are given by their

ancient chronicles of their first settlements are generally tales

confuted by their own absurdity. The settlement of the greatest

consequence, the best authenticated, and from which the Irish deduce the

pedigree of the best families, is derived from Spain: it was called Clan

Milea, or the descendants of Milesius, and Kin Scuit, or the race of

Scyths, afterwards known by the name of Scots. The Irish historians

suppose this race descended from a person called Gathel, a Scythian by

birth, an Egyptian by education, the contemporary and friend of the

prophet Moses. But these histories, seeming clear-sighted in the obscure

affairs of so blind an antiquity, instead of passing for treasuries of

ancient facts, are regarded by the judicious as modern fictions. In

cases of this sort rational conjectures are more to be relied on than

improbable relations. It is most probable that Ireland was first peopled

from Britain. The coasts of these countries are in some places in sight

of each other. The language, the manners, and religion of the most

ancient inhabitants of both are nearly the same. The Milesian colony,

whenever it arrived in Ireland, could have made no great change in the

manners or language; as the ancient Spaniards were a branch of the

Celtæ, as well as the old inhabitants of Ireland. The Irish language is

not different from that of all other nations, as Temple and Rapin, from

ignorance of it, have asserted; on the contrary, many of its words bear

a remarkable resemblance not only to those of the Welsh and Armoric, but

also to the Greek and Latin. Neither is the figure of the letters very

different from the vulgar character, though their order is not the same

with that of other nations, nor the names, which are taken from the

Irish proper names of several species of trees: a circumstance which,

notwithstanding their similitude to the Roman letters, argues a

different original and great antiquity. The Druid discipline anciently

flourished in that island. In the fourth century it fell down before the

preaching of St. Patrick. Then the Christian religion was embraced and

cultivated with an uncommon zeal, which displayed itself in the number

and consequence of the persons who in all parts embraced the

contemplative life. This mode of life, and the situation of Ireland,

removed from the horror of those devastations which shook the rest of

Europe, made it a refuge for learning, almost extinguished everywhere

else. Science flourished in Ireland during the seventh and eighth

centuries. The same cause which destroyed it in other countries also

destroyed it there. The Danes, then pagans, made themselves masters of

the island, after a long and wasteful war, in which they destroyed the

sciences along with the monasteries in which they were cultivated. By as

destructive a war they were at length expelled; but neither their

ancient science nor repose returned to the Irish, who, falling into

domestic distractions as soon as they were freed from their foreign

enemies, sunk quickly into a state of ignorance, poverty, and barbarism,

which must have been very great, since it exceeded that of the rest of

Europe. The disorders in the Church were equal to those in the civil

economy, and furnished to the Pope a plausible pretext for giving Henry

a commission to conquer the kingdom, in order to reform it.

The Irish were divided into a number of tribes or clans, each clan

forming within itself a separate government. It was ordered by a chief,

who was not raised to that dignity either by election or by the ordinary

course of descent, but as the eldest and worthiest of the blood of the

deceased lord. This order of succession, called Tanistry, was said to

have been invented in the Danish troubles, lest the tribe, during a

minority, should have been endangered for want of a sufficient leader.

It was probably much more ancient: but it was, however, attended with

very great and pernicious inconveniencies, as it was obviously an affair

of difficulty to determine who should be called the worthiest of the

blood; and a door being always left open for ambition, this order

introduced a greater mischief than it was intended to remedy. Almost

every tribe, besides its contention with the neighboring tribes,

nourished faction and discontent within itself. The chiefs we speak of

were in general called Tierna, or Lords, and those of more consideration

Riagh, or Kings. Over these were placed five kings more eminent than

the rest, answerable to the five provinces into which the island was

anciently divided. These again were subordinate to one head, who was

called Monarch of all Ireland, raised to that power by election, or,

more properly speaking, by violence.

Whilst the dignities of the state were disposed of by a sort of

election, the office of judges, who were called Brehons, the trades of

mechanics, and even those arts which we are apt to consider as depending

principally on natural genius, such as poetry and music, were confined

in succession to certain races: the Irish imagining that greater

advantages were to be derived from an early institution, and the

affection of parents desirous of perpetuating the secrets of their art

in their families, than from the casual efforts of particular fancy and

application. This is much in the strain of the Eastern policy; but these

and many other of the Irish institutions, well enough calculated to

preserve good arts and useful discipline, when these arts came to

degenerate, were equally well calculated to prevent all improvement and

to perpetuate corruption, by infusing an invincible tenaciousness of

ancient customs.

The people of Ireland were much more addicted to pasturage than

agriculture, not more from the quality of their soil than from a remnant

of the Scythian manners. They had but few towns, and those not

fortified, each clan living dispersed over its own territory. The few

walled towns they had lay on the sea-coast; they were built by the

Danes, and held after they had lost their conquests in the inland parts:

here was carried on the little foreign trade which the island then

possessed.

The Irish militia was of two kinds: one called _kerns_, which were

foot, slightly armed with a long knife or dagger, and almost naked; the

other, _galloglasses,_ who were horse, poorly mounted, and generally

armed only with a battle-axe. Neither horse nor foot made much use of

the spear, the sword, or the bow. With indifferent arms, they had still

worse discipline. In these circumstances, their natural bravery, which,

though considerable, was not superior to that of their invaders, stood

them in little stead.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1167.]

Such was the situation of things in Ireland, when Dermot, King of

Leinster, having violently carried away the wife of one of the

neighboring petty sovereigns, Roderic, King of Connaught and Monarch of

Ireland, joined with the injured husband to punish so flagrant an

outrage, and with their united forces spoiled Dermot of his territories,

and obliged him to abandon the kingdom. The fugitive prince, not

unapprised of Henry's designs upon his country, threw himself at his

feet, implored his protection, and promised to hold of him, as his

feudatory, the sovereignty he should recover by his assistance. Henry

was at this time at Guienne. Nothing could be more agreeable to him than

such an incident; but as his French dominions actually lay under an

interdict, on account of his quarrel with Becket, and all his affairs,

both at home and abroad, were in a troubled and dubious situation, it

was not prudent to remove his person, nor venture any considerable body

of his forces on a distant enterprise. Yet not willing to lose so

favorable an opportunity, he warmly recommended the cause of Dermot to

his regency in England, permitting and encouraging all persons to arm in

his favor: a permission, in this age of enterprise, greedily accepted by

many; but the person who brought the most assistance to it, and indeed

gave a form and spirit to the whole design, was Richard, Earl of

Strigul, commonly known by the name of Strongbow. Dermot, to confirm in

his interest this potent and warlike peer, promised him his daughter in

marriage, with the reversion of his crown.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1169.]

[Sidenote: A.D. 1171.]

The beginnings of so great an enterprise were formed with a very slender

force. Not four hundred men landed near Wexford: they took the town by

storm. When reinforced, they did not exceed twelve hundred; but, being

joined with three thousand men by Dermot, with an incredible rapidity of

success they reduced Waterford, Dublin, Limerick, the only considerable

cities in Ireland. By the novelty of their arms they had obtained some

striking advantages in their first engagements; and by these advantages

they attained a superiority of opinion over the Irish, which every

success Increased. Before the effect of this first impression had time

to wear off, Henry, having settled his affairs abroad, entered the

harbor of Cork with a fleet of four hundred sail, at once to secure the

conquest, and the allegiance of the conquerors. The fame of so great a

force arriving under a prince dreaded by all Europe very soon disposed

all the petty princes, with their King Roderic, to submit and do homage

to Henry. They had not been able to resist the arms of his vassals, and

they hoped better treatment from submitting to the ambition of a great

king, who left them everything but the honor of their independency, than

from the avarice of adventurers, from which nothing was secure. The

bishops and the body of the clergy greatly contributed to this

submission, from respect to the Pope, and the horror of their late

defeats, which they began to regard as judgments. A national council was

held at Cashel for bringing the Church of Ireland to a perfect

conformity in rites and discipline to that of England. It is not to be

thought that in this council the temporal interests of England were

entirely forgotten. Many of the English were established in their

particular conquests under the tenure of knights' service, now first

introduced into Ireland: a tenure which, if it has not proved the best

calculated to secure the obedience of the vassal to the sovereign, has

never failed in any instance of preserving a vanquished people in

obedience to the conquerors. The English lords built strong castles on

their demesnes; they put themselves at the head of the tribes whose

chiefs they had slain; they assumed the Irish garb and manners; and

thus, partly by force, partly by policy, the first English families took

a firm root in Ireland. It was, indeed, long before they were able

entirely to subdue the island to the laws of England; but the continual

efforts of the Irish for more than four hundred years proved

insufficient to dislodge them.

Whilst Henry was extending his conquests to the western limits of the

known world, the whole fabric of his power was privately sapped and

undermined, and ready to overwhelm him with the ruins, in the very

moment when he seemed to be arrived at the highest and most permanent

point of grandeur and glory. His excessive power, his continual

accessions to it, and an ambition which by words and actions declared

that the whole world was not sufficient for a great man, struck a just

terror into all the potentates near him: he was, indeed, arrived at that

pitch of greatness, that the means of his ruin could only be found in

his own family. A numerous offspring, which is generally considered as

the best defence of the throne, and the support as well as ornament of

declining royalty, proved on this occasion the principal part of the

danger. Henry had in his lawful bed, besides daughters, four sons,

Henry, Richard, Geoffrey, and John, all growing up with great hopes from

their early courage and love of glory. No father was ever more delighted

with these hopes, nor more tender and indulgent to his children. A

custom had long prevailed in France for the reigning king to crown his

eldest son in his lifetime. By this policy, in turbulent times, and

whilst the principles of succession were unsettled, he secured the crown

to his posterity. Henry gladly imitated a policy enforced no less by

paternal affection than its utility to public peace. He had, during his

troubles with Becket, crowned his son Henry, then no more than sixteen

years old. But the young king, even on the day of his coronation,

discovered an haughtiness which threatened not to content itself with

the share of authority to which the inexperience of his youth and the

nature of a provisional crown confined him. The name of a king

continually reminded him that he only possessed the name. The King of

France, whose daughter he had espoused, fomented a discontent which grew

with his years. Geoffrey, who had married the heiress of Bretagne, on

the death of her father claimed to no purpose the entire sovereignty of

his wife's inheritance, which Henry, under a pretence of guardianship to

a son of full age, still retained in his hands. Richard had not the same

plausible pretences, but he had yet greater ambition. He contended for

the Duchy of Guienne before his mother's death, which, alone could give

him the color of a title to it. The queen, his mother, hurried on by her

own unquiet spirit, or, as some think, stimulated by jealousy,

encouraged their rebellion against her husband. The King of France, who

moved all the other engines, engaged the King of Scotland, the Earl of

Flanders, then a powerful prince, the Earl of Blois, and the Earl of

Boulogne in the conspiracy. The barons in Bretagne, in Guienne, and even

in England, were ready to take up arms in the same cause; whether it was

that they perceived the uniform plan the king had pursued in order to

their reduction, or were solely instigated by the natural fierceness and

levity of their minds, fond of every dangerous novelty. The historians

of that time seldom afford us a tolerable insight into the causes of the

transactions they relate; but whatever were the causes of so

extraordinary a conspiracy, it was not discovered until the moment it

was ready for execution. The first token of it appeared in the young

king's demand to have either England or Normandy given up to him. The

refusal of this demand served as a signal to all parties to put

themselves in motion. The younger Henry fled into France; Louis entered

Normandy with a vast army; the barons of Bretagne under Geoffrey, and

those of Guienne under Richard, rose in arms; the King of Scotland

pierced into England; and the Earl of Leicester, at the head of fourteen

thousand Flemings, landed in Suffolk.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1173]

[Sidenote: A.D. 1174]

It was on this trying occasion that Henry displayed a greatness

independent of all fortune. For, beset by all the neighboring powers,

opposed by his own children, betrayed by his wife, abandoned by one part

of his subjects, uncertain of the rest, every part of his state rotten

and suspicious, his magnanimity grew beneath the danger; and when all

the ordinary resources failed, he found superior resources in his own

courage, wisdom, and activity. There were at that time dispersed over

Europe bodies of mercenary troops, called Brabançons, composed of

fugitives from different nations, men who were detached from any

country, and who, by making war a perpetual trade, and passing from

service to service, had acquired an experience and military knowledge

uncommon in those days. Henry took twenty thousand of these mercenaries

into his service, and, as he paid them punctually, and kept them always

in action, they served him with fidelity. The Papal authority, so often

subservient, so often prejudicial to his designs, he called to his

assistance in a cause which did not misbecome it,--the cause of a father

attacked by his children. This took off the ill impression left by

Becket's death, and kept the bishops firm in their allegiance. Having

taken his measures with judgment, he pursued the war in Normandy with

vigor. In this war his mercenaries had a great and visible advantage

over the feudal armies of France: the latter, not so useful while they

remained in the field, entered it late in the summer, and commonly left

it in forty days. The King of France was forced to raise the siege of

Verneuil, to evacuate Normandy, and agree to a truce. Then, at the head

of his victorious Brabançons, Henry marched into Brittany with an

incredible expedition. The rebellious army, astonished as much by the

celerity of his march as the fury of his attack, was totally routed. The

principal towns and castles were reduced soon after. The custody of the

conquered country being lodged in faithful hands, he flew to the relief

of England. There his natural son Geoffrey, Bishop elect of Ely,

faithful during the rebellion of all his legitimate offspring, steadily

maintained his cause, though with forces much inferior to his zeal. The

king, before he entered into action, thought it expedient to perform his

expiation at the tomb of Becket. Hardly had he finished this ceremony,

when the news arrived that the Scotch army was totally defeated, and

their king made prisoner. This victory was universally attributed to the

prayers of Becket; and whilst it established the credit of the new

saint, it established Henry in the minds of his people: they no longer

looked upon their king as an object of the Divine vengeance, but as a

penitent reconciled to Heaven, and under the special protection of the

martyr he had made. The Flemish army, after several severe checks,

capitulated to evacuate the kingdom. The rebellious barons submitted

soon after. All was quiet in England; but the King of France renewed

hostilities in Normandy, and laid siege to Rouen. Henry recruited his

army with a body of auxiliary Welsh, arrived at Rouen with his usual

expedition, raised the siege, and drove the King of France quite out of

Normandy. It was then that he agreed to an accommodation, and in the

terms of peace, which he dictated in the midst of victory to his sons,

his subjects, and his enemies, there was seen on one hand the tenderness

of a father, and on the other the moderation of a wise man, not

insensible of the mutability of fortune.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1176]

The war which threatened his ruin being so happily ended, the greatness

of the danger served only to enhance his glory; whilst he saw the King

of France humbled, the Flemings defeated, the King of Scotland a

prisoner, and his sons and subjects reduced to the bounds of their duty.

He employed this interval of peace to secure its continuance, and to

prevent a return of the like evils; for which reason he made many

reforms in the laws and polity of his dominions. He instituted itinerant

justices, to weaken the power of the great barons, and even of the

sheriffs, who were hardly more obedient,--an institution which, with

great public advantages, has remained to our times. In the spirit of the

same policy he armed the whole body of the people: the English

commonalty had been in a manner disarmed ever since the Conquest. In

this regulation we may probably trace the origin of the militia, which,

being under the orders of the crown rather in a political than a feudal

respect, were judged more to be relied on than the soldiers of tenure,

to whose pride and power they might prove a sort of counterpoise. Amidst

these changes the affairs of the clergy remained untouched. The king had

experienced how dangerous it was to attempt removing foundations so

deeply laid both in strength and opinion. He therefore wisely aimed at

acquiring the favor of that body, and turning to his own advantage a

power he should in vain attempt to overthrow, but which he might set up

against another power, which it was equally his interest to reduce.

Though these measures were taken with the greatest judgment, and seemed

to promise a peaceful evening to his reign, the seeds of rebellion

remained still at home, and the dispositions that nourished them were

rather increased abroad. The parental authority, respectable at all

times, ought to have the greatest force in times when the manners are

rude and the laws imperfect. At that time Europe had not emerged out of

barbarism, yet this great natural bond of society was extremely weak.

The number of foreign obligations and duties almost dissolved the family

obligations. From the moment a young man was knighted, so far as related

to his father, he became absolute master of his own conduct; but he

contracted at the same time a sort of filial relation with the person

who had knighted him. These various principles of duty distracted one

another. The custom which then prevailed, of bestowing lands and

jurisdictions, under the name of Appanages, to the sons of kings and the

greater nobility, gave them a power which was frequently employed

against the giver; and the military and licentious manners of the age

almost destroyed every trace of every kind of regular authority. In the

East, where the rivalship of brothers is so dangerous, such is the force

of paternal power amongst a rude people, we scarce ever hear of a son in

arms against his father. In Europe, for several ages, it was very

common. It was Henry's great misfortune to suffer in a particular manner

from this disorder.

[Sidenote: A.D. 1180.]

[Sidenote: A.D. 1183.]

[Sidenote: A.D. 1188.]

[Sidenote: A.D. 1189.]

Philip succeeded Louis, King of France. He followed closely the plan of

his predecessor, to reduce the great vassals, and the King of England,

who was the greatest of them; but he followed it with far more skill and

vigor, though he made use of the same instruments in the work. He

revived the spirit of rebellion in the princes, Henry's sons. These

young princes were never in harmony with each other but in a confederacy

against their father, and the father had no recourse but in the

melancholy safety derived from the disunion of his children. This he

thought it expedient to increase; but such policy, when discovered, has

always a dangerous effect. The sons, having just quarrelled enough to

give room for an explanation of each other's designs, and to display

those of their father, enter into a new conspiracy. In the midst of

these motions the young king dies, and showed at his death such signs of

a sincere repentance as served to revive the old king's tenderness, and

to take away all comfort for his loss. The death of his third son,

Geoffrey, followed close upon the heels of this funeral. He died at

Paris, whither he had gone to concert measures against his father.

Richard and John remained. Richard, fiery, restless, ambitious, openly

took up arms, and pursued the war with implacable rancor, and such

success as drove the king, in the decline of his life, to a dishonorable

treaty; nor was he then content, but excited new troubles. John was his

youngest and favorite child; in him he reposed all his hopes, and

consoled himself for the undutifulness of his other sons; but after

concluding the treaty with the King of France and Richard, he found too

soon that John had been as deep as any in the conspiracy. This was his

last wound: afflicted by his children in their deaths and harassed in

their lives, mortified as a father and a king, worn down with cares and

sorrows more than with years, he died, cursing his fortune, his

children, and the hour of his birth. When he perceived that death

approached him, by his own desire he was carried into a church and laid

at the altar's foot. Hardly had he expired, when he was stripped, then

forsaken by his attendants, and left a long time a naked and unheeded

body in an empty church: affording a just consolation for the obscurity

of a mean fortune, and an instructive lesson how little an outward

greatness and enjoyments foreign to the mind contribute towards a solid

felicity, in the example of one who was the greatest of kings and the

unhappiest of mankind.

FOOTNOTES:

[78] Seld. Tithes, p. 482.

[79] LL. Ethelred. Si presbyter homicida fieret, &c.

[80] LL. Cnuti, 38, De Ministro Altaris Homicida. Idem, 40, De Ordinato

Capitis reo.

[81] LL. H.I. 57, De Querela Vicinorum; and 56 [66?]. De Ordinato qui

Vitam forisfaciat, in Fœd. Alured. et Guthurn., apud Spel. Concil.

376, 1st vol.; LL. Edw. et Guthurn., 3, De Correctione Ordinatorum.

The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, Vol. 07 (of 12) · 第 6 / 9 章